I can’t see https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/e/2PACX-1vQpaSSm7Amk9q4sBEAUi_IpyJ4l07qd3t5T_BPZkdLWfYbtSpSmF7obSB1qRGA65wjiiq2Sb7H2ylJo/pub?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000&slide=id.p <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/e/2PACX-1vQpaSSm7Amk9q4sBEAUi_IpyJ4l07qd3t5T_BPZkdLWfYbtSpSmF7obSB1qRGA65wjiiq2Sb7H2ylJo/pub?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000&slide=id.p>
> On Mar 12, 2018, at 11:39 AM, Ken Giusti <kgiu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Josh - I'm able to view all of them, but I probably have special > google powers ;) > > Which links are broken for you? > > thanks, > > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Joshua Harlow <harlo...@fastmail.com> wrote: >> >> Can we get some of those doc links opened. >> >> 'You need permission to access this published document.' I am getting for a >> few of them :( >> >> >> Ben Nemec wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Here's my summary of the discussions we had in the Oslo room at the PTG. >>> Please feel free to reply with any additions if I missed something or >>> correct anything I've misrepresented. >>> >>> oslo.config drivers for secret management >>> ----------------------------------------- >>> >>> The oslo.config implementation is in progress, while the Castellan >>> driver still needs to be written. We want to land this early in Rocky as >>> it is a significant change in architecture for oslo.config and we want >>> it to be well-exercised before release. >>> >>> There are discussions with the TripleO team around adding support for >>> this feature to its deployment tooling and there will be a functional >>> test job for the Castellan driver with Custodia. >>> >>> There is a weekly meeting in #openstack-meeting-3 on Tuesdays at 1600 >>> UTC for discussion of this feature. >>> >>> oslo.config driver implementation: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/513844 >>> spec: >>> >>> https://specs.openstack.org/openstack/oslo-specs/specs/queens/oslo-config-drivers.html >>> >>> Custodia key management support for Castellan: >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/515190/ >>> >>> "stable" libraries >>> ------------------ >>> >>> Some of the Oslo libraries are in a mature state where there are very >>> few, if any, meaningful changes to them. With the removal of the >>> requirements sync process in Rocky, we may need to change the release >>> process for these libraries. My understanding was that there were no >>> immediate action items for this, but it was something we need to be >>> aware of. >>> >>> dropping support for mox3 >>> ------------------------- >>> >>> There was some concern that no one from the Oslo team is actually in a >>> position to support mox3 if something were to break (such as happened in >>> some libraries with Python 3.6). Since there is a community goal to >>> remove mox from all OpenStack projects in Rocky this will hopefully not >>> be a long-term problem, but there was some discussion that if projects >>> needed to keep mox for some reason that they would be asked to provide a >>> maintainer for mox3. This topic is kind of on hold pending the outcome >>> of the community goal this cycle. >>> >>> automatic configuration migration on upgrade >>> -------------------------------------------- >>> >>> There is a desire for oslo.config to provide a mechanism to >>> automatically migrate deprecated options to their new location on >>> version upgrades. This is a fairly complex topic that I can't cover >>> adequately in a summary email, but there is a spec proposed at >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/520043/ and POC changes at >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/526314/ and >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/526261/ >>> >>> One outcome of the discussion was that in the initial version we would >>> not try to handle complex migrations, such as the one that happened when >>> we combined all of the separate rabbit connection opts into a single >>> connection string. To start with we will just raise a warning to the >>> user that they need to handle those manually, but a templated or >>> hook-based method of automating those migrations could be added as a >>> follow-up if there is sufficient demand. >>> >>> oslo.messaging plans >>> -------------------- >>> >>> There was quite a bit discussed under this topic. I'm going to break it >>> down into sub-topics for clarity. >>> >>> oslo.messaging heartbeats >>> ========================= >>> >>> Everyone seemed to be in favor of this feature, so we anticipate >>> development moving forward in Rocky. There is an initial patch proposed >>> at https://review.openstack.org/546763 >>> >>> We felt that it should be possible to opt in and out of the feature, and >>> that the configuration should be done at the application level. This >>> should _not_ be an operator decision as they do not have the knowledge >>> to make it sanely. >>> >>> There was also a desire to have a TTL for messages. >>> >>> bug cleanup >>> =========== >>> >>> There are quite a few launchpad bugs open against oslo.messaging that >>> were reported against old, now unsupported versions. Since we have the >>> launchpad bug expirer enabled in Oslo the action item proposed for such >>> bugs was to mark them incomplete and ask the reporter to confirm that >>> they still occur against a supported version. This way bugs that don't >>> reproduce or where the reporter has lost interest will eventually be >>> closed automatically, but bugs that do still exist can be updated with >>> more current information. >>> >>> deprecations >>> ============ >>> >>> The Pika driver will be deprecated in Rocky. To our knowledge, no one >>> has ever used it and there are no known benefits over the existing >>> Rabbit driver. >>> >>> Once again, the ZeroMQ driver was proposed for deprecation as well. The >>> CI jobs for ZMQ have been broken for a while, and there doesn't seem to >>> be much interest in maintaining them. Furthermore, the breakage seems to >>> be a fundamental problem with the driver that would require non-trivial >>> work to fix. >>> >>> Given that ZMQ has been a consistent pain point in oslo.messaging over >>> the past few years, it was proposed that if someone does step forward >>> and want to maintain it going forward then we should split the driver >>> off into its own library which could then have its own core team and >>> iterate independently of oslo.messaging. However, at this time the plan >>> is to propose the deprecation and start that discussion first. >>> >>> CI >>> == >>> >>> Need to migrate oslo.messaging to zuulv3 native jobs. The >>> openstackclient library was proposed as a good example of how to do so. >>> >>> We also want to have voting hybrid messaging jobs (where the >>> notification and rpc messages are sent via different backends). We will >>> define a devstack job variant that other projects can turn on if desired. >>> >>> We also want to add amqp1 support to pifpaf for functional testing. >>> >>> Low level messaging API >>> ======================= >>> >>> A proposal for a new oslo.messaging API to expose lower level messaging >>> functionality was proposed. There is a presentation at >>> >>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1mCOGwROmpJvsBgCTFKo4PnK6s8DkDVCp1qnRnoKL_Yo/edit?usp=sharing >>> >>> >>> This seemed to generally be well-received by the room, and dragonflow >>> and neutron reviewers were suggested for the spec. >>> >>> Kafka >>> ===== >>> >>> Andy Smith gave an update on the status of the Kafka driver. Currently >>> it is still experimental, and intended to be used for notifications >>> only. There is a presentation with more details in >>> >>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/e/2PACX-1vQpaSSm7Amk9q4sBEAUi_IpyJ4l07qd3t5T_BPZkdLWfYbtSpSmF7obSB1qRGA65wjiiq2Sb7H2ylJo/pub?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000&slide=id.p >>> >>> >>> testing for Edge/FEMDC use cases >>> ================================ >>> >>> Matthieu Simonin gave a presentation about the testing he has done >>> related to messaging in the Edge/FEMDC scenario where messaging targets >>> might be widely distributed. The slides can be found at >>> >>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1LcF8WcihRDOGmOPIU1aUlkFd1XkHXEnaxIoLmRN4iXw/edit#slide=id.p3 >>> >>> >>> In short, there is a desire to build clouds that have widely distributed >>> nodes such that content can be delivered to users from a location as >>> close as possible. This puts a lot of pressure on the messaging layer as >>> compute nodes (for example) could be halfway around the world from the >>> control nodes, which is problematic for a broker-based system such as >>> Rabbit. There is some very interesting data comparing Rabbit with a more >>> distributed AMQP1 system based on qpid-dispatch-router. In short, the >>> distributed system performed much better for this use case, although >>> there was still some concern raised about the memory usage on the client >>> side with both drivers. Some followup is needed on the oslo.messaging >>> side to make sure we aren't leaking/wasting resources in some messaging >>> scenarios. >>> >>> For further details I suggest taking a look at the presentation. >>> >>> mutable configuration >>> --------------------- >>> >>> This is also a community goal for Rocky, and Chang Bo is driving its >>> adoption. There was some discussion of how to test it, and also that we >>> should provide an example of turning on mutability for the debug option >>> since that is the target of the community goal. The cinder patch can be >>> found here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/464028/ Turns out it's >>> really simple! >>> >>> Nova is also using this functionality for more complex options related >>> to upgrades, so that would be a good place to look for more advanced use >>> cases. >>> >>> Full documentation for the mutable config options is at >>> https://docs.openstack.org/oslo.config/latest/reference/mutable.html >>> >>> The goal status is being tracked in >>> https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2001545 >>> >>> Chang Bo was also going to talk to Lance about possibly coming up with a >>> burndown chart like the one he had for the policy in code work. >>> >>> oslo healthcheck middleware >>> --------------------------- >>> >>> As this ended up being the only major topic for the afternoon, the >>> session was unfortunately lightly attended. However, the self-healing >>> SIG was talking about related topics at the same time so we ended up >>> moving to that room and had a good discussion. >>> >>> Overall the feature seemed to be well-received. There is some security >>> concern with exposing service information over an un-authenticated >>> endpoint, but because there is no authentication supported by the health >>> checking functionality in things like Kubernetes or HAProxy this is >>> unavoidable. The feature won't be mandatory, so if this exposure is >>> unacceptable it can be turned off (with a corresponding loss of >>> functionality, of course). >>> >>> There was also some discussion of dropping the asynchronous nature of >>> the checks in the initial version in order to keep the complexity to a >>> minimum. Asynchronous testing can always be added later if it proves >>> necessary. >>> >>> The full spec is at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/531456 >>> >>> oslo.config strict validation >>> ----------------------------- >>> >>> I actually had discussions with multiple people about this during the >>> week. In both cases, they were just looking for a minimal amount of >>> validation that would catch an error such at "devug=True". Such a >>> validation might be fairly simple to write now that we have the >>> YAML-based sample config with (ideally) information about all the >>> options available to set in a project. It should be possible to compare >>> the options set in the config file with the ones listed in the sample >>> config and raise warnings for any that don't exist. >>> >>> There is also a more complete validation spec at >>> >>> http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/oslo-specs/specs/ocata/oslo-validator.html >>> and a patch proposed at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/384559/ >>> >>> Unfortunately there has been little movement on that as of late, so it >>> might be worthwhile to implement something more minimalist initially and >>> then build from there. The existing patch is quite significant and >>> difficult to review. >>> >>> Conclusion >>> ---------- >>> >>> I feel like there were a lot of good discussions at the PTG and we have >>> plenty of work to keep the small Oslo team busy for the Rocky cycle. :-) >>> >>> Thanks to everyone who participated and I look forward to seeing how >>> much progress we've made at the next Summit and PTG. >>> >>> -Ben >>> >>> __________________________________________________________________________ >>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > -- > Ken Giusti (kgiu...@gmail.com) > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev